/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16135070
>Yeah it's almost like we've taken enormous steps to reduce cancer causing agents across populations,
But that's not it at all. Lifetime cancer incidence is at all time highs, for all sorts of reasons. It's that treatment is getting better and better. Turns out, making a global effort across ALL borders and non stop funding for 70+ years yields results.
Medical technology is fucking INSANE at the cutting edge, most of you have no idea. The trick is somehow scaling it now. They hope AI figures it out for them.
Consider Picrel.
Depending on your inputs, the short, sharp wave can me MUCH better overall. Quick disruption, supply chains intact, no incursion of tens of trillions of debt, widespread natural immunity.

If the red volume/area of the chart is smaller than the blue volume/area, then doesn't that suggest a short, intense pandemic may have been less deadly overall than a protracted, drawn-out, lengthened one?

>>16052978
>I''ll have a booster if something radically different from Omicron pops up
Why? Have you got natural immunity from a previous Omicron infection and feel confident you won't get sick from it unless it mutates a bit?
That's the funniest thing about vaxxies. Despite everything they might say, they all behave as if having suffered Covid before, they're unlikely to catch the same strain again. And they're right. Because the natural immunity everyone has since the omicron wave is what all-but wiped out Covid, fating it to the embarrassing destiny of being a minor sniffle that 99.9999% of people shrug off and is used as an excuse for a day or two off work at worst. Surprise, surprise.
Vaxxies and the people who demanded and enforced the most disruptive reactions to Covid need to lose their pensions. A small price to pay, considering they have spent our collective pension in the form of trillions in public debt, for what? To shatter global logistics networks and ensure that the pandemic lasted as long as possible?
This isn't hyperbole. What do you think "flattening the curve" means? To shrink X, Y must lengthen. What could have been a simple but larger than usual respiratory disease wave could have been allowed to flare up as the northern hemisphere was entering spring and summer, and people were at their healthiest point of the year. As the climate science tells us, 2020 was a very warm year compared to the pre-industrial average. 2020 summer should have been a global "chicken pox party" for the 99% of people who weren't at risk for anything more than a bad cold. That would have actually helped reduce transmission much faster. Someone who can do maths can figure out the formula, but at some point, flattening the curve for long enough can mean that even a very small number on the X axis can mean a much higher overall death figure than if you have a short but tall spike.

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2022/01/14/dont-just-do-something-stand-there/